How does science know when a creature it knows from the fossil record goes extinct? How do they calculate how long it has supposedly been extinct? Remember the coelacanth? According to science pre-1938, the coelacanth, a type of fish, had been extinct for nearly 70,000,000 years.

In other words, extinct for a longer period than the dinosaurs are said to have been extinct.

â€śBefore coelacanths were caught, evolutionists incorrectly believed that the coelacanth had lungs, a large brain, and four bottom fins about to evolve into legs. Evolutionists reasoned that the coelacanth, or a similar fish, crawled out of a shallow sea and filled its lungs with air, becoming the first four-legged land animal. Millions of students have been incorrectly taught that this fish was the ancestor of all amphibians, reptiles, dinosaurs, birds, and mammals, including peopleâ€ťâ€¦.creationscience.com

Then of course, someone caught one in 1938 and other specimens and populations of the fish have been found in various places, including in the Indian Ocean northwest of Madagascar.

It turns out that science was wrong about the extinction of and evolution of coelacanth by; infinity! :0)

So what about dinosaurs? Science claims that they have been extinct for more than 45 to 65 million years. How do they know that? (You don’t see any around, do you? ) And, even if all dinosaurs were in fact extinct, how could science know how long ago that occurred? Dinosaurs supposedly became extinct before man â€śevolvedâ€ť (according to current evolutionary theories) so there should be no memory of dinosaur in man.

Yet, virtually every ancient culture has included â€śdragonsâ€ť â€“very dinosaur like creatures, in their history and art. The particular type of dinosaur that we want to reference here are the Ankylosaurids; armored dinosaurs of various sizes and shapes but featuring body armor, scales and spikes.

Ankylosaurs

â€śAnkylosaurus was a huge armored dinosaur, measuring about 25-35 feet long, 6 feet wide and 4 feet tall; it weighed roughly 3-4 tons. It became extinct, according to evolutionists over 45 million years ago.â€ť Dubiarestlessplanet.com

“An ankylosaurid is a member of the Ankylosauridae family of armored dinosaurs that evolved 125 million years ago (along with another family of ankylosaurs, the Nodosauridae) and became extinct 65 million years ago during the Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event.

Ankylosaurids have been found in western North America, Europe and East Asia, though good specimens are rare; most are known only from bone fragments.

The heavy armour, forming a veritable shell on the backs of ankylosaurids and their clubbed tails, makes them look superficially similar to the mammalian glyptodonts (and to a lesser degree to the giant meiolaniid turtles of Australia).

Their heavily armoured heads formed a toothless beak at the front (comparable to modern birds), though the sides of the mouth and the lower jaw did bear small teeth, deeply inset from the jaw.” Wikipedia

The Tarasque

Photo: Comparison of Ankylosaurid dinosaurs and antique depictions of the Tarasque
Click for Hi Res Photo

The Tarasque has been adopted of late in a number of games; Dungeons and Dragons for one. The Tarasque of history/mythology was a dragon-like creature with a body carapace like a â€śturtleâ€ť, well armored, difficult to kill, very large, having spikes (cones) on its body and on its tail. Itâ€™s tail was said to to have also been armored and to have ended in a scorpionâ€™s tail.

The anklyosaurid dinosaur if it had been seen alive, would closely match that description save for the scorpionsâ€™ tail. Itâ€™s tail would have ended in a club unless it was of the nodosaur variety which were also large but whose tail did not end with a club.

The â€śproblemâ€ť is, however that everyone knows that this type of dinosaur became extinct 65 million years ago and thus this could not be a depiction of that type of creature. When discussing Tarasque it is the rule to emphasize the mythological aspects of its description rather than the physical descriptions that recall this dinosaur.

If such a dinosaur was actually seen is it any wonder that the description of it should be less than perfect, subject to exaggeration and speculation and that â€śmythologicalâ€ť details as to its origin and purpose might have followed?

Could science be wrong by “infinity” again? Faith based evolution believers do not even need to look at the evidence to decide.